All language subtitles for Spaces Deepest Secrets S01E06 The Plot Against Gravity iNTERNAL720pHDTVx264-DHD

This is the story

of an incredible
scientific adventure,

of an unlikely collection
of scientists and engineers,

dreamers and schemers,
who attempted the impossible...

Aaaah!

To control gravity.

Gravity is the fundamental force

that holds us to the earth
and binds the universe together,

yet, we still don't
fully understand it.

Gravity is the most mysterious

of all the fundamental forces.

The ultimate challenge
I can think of,

as a scientist,
is to control gravity.

The scientific quest
triggered a race

between rival corporations,
government, and military.

It can destroy the missiles

or remove them
from their trajectory.

Fueled by the paranoid fear
of missing

the greatest technological
advance in history.

If just one idea works,

if only partly,

you won the jackpot!

If the dream of gravity
control ever came true,

it would revolutionize the world

and could send us to the stars.

Aaaaah!

Aaah!

Captions by vitac
www.Vitac.Com

captions paid for by
Discovery communications

In the late 1980s,

aerospace engineer Ron Evans
was working

in the defense industry
in lancashire, england.

He'd been trying to find a way
to detect stealth bombers

using fluctuations in gravity

and he wondered if he could
take it even further.

Could he use gravity
to levitate a plane?

Of course, it was impossible.

But Ron did something
a bit reckless.

He asked his employer
if they'd let him try.

Ron's employer was
the biggest defense

and aerospace contractor
in Europe: Bae systems.

And, instead of telling him
to have a cup of tea and a nap,

they listened.

I had to go to the head
of the technology board...

it's a panel...

and persuade them
that it was worth doing.

Now, clearly,
it was very speculative.

I had to go away

and come up with some concepts
and come up with some ideas

that could actually
feature an antigravity

or a gravity-type
propulsion system.

Well, this is one of the designs
that we came up with.

For start,
it wouldn't be limited

to just flying in the air.

It could fly anywhere,
into space, even into water.

And, of course, it was
a vertical takeoff design

because it had
a gravity engine inside.

But it didn't look very exciting

and so we asked the artist

to put some green rays
underneath.

That made it look
far more futuristic.

Let's be clear

that not everyone in the company
thought we should be doing it.

There were quite a few that felt
"we make aircraft.

We're good at it and that's
what we should be doing."

But there were a few,

and some very senior people,
that felt, "okay."

Let's just have
a little look at the future"

and the concept became known
as Greenglow.

As head of Project Greenglow,

Ron's job was to find
and develop

advanced propulsion systems
to overcome gravity.

The potential was
enormous, if it happened.

It would totally change
aerospace.

And Ron was not alone.

At around the same time,
in the U.S.,

NASA began a parallel project,

headed by aerospace engineer
Marc Millis.

It was around 1996
when I was asked

to lead the breakthrough
propulsion physics project.

Things like
nonrocket space drives,

interstellar propulsion,

and manipulating gravity,
things like that.

For that project, the idea was
to think radical, think big.

Today, NASA says it has moved on

and doesn't want to look back.

We can't go in there
to talk about it now

because NASA's not doing
that work right now.

At bae systems,
the same situation:

The company no longer wants
to discuss Project Greenglow.

We asked whether we could go
there and talk to them about it

and they just said no.

Gravity control
is a dark and dangerous science,

but, like modern-day alchemy,
it promises a glittering prize.

But it can destroy
your reputation.

Years earlier, Ron had watched
a gravity experiment

bring down one of britain's
best-known scientists...

this time, I call
for a volunteer.

Professor of engineering
at imperial college London

Eric Laithwaite.

And then, we're gonna SPiN up

the biggest gyro of the
day, which is here.

Like millions of others,
Ron had been spellbound

by Laithwaite's
Christmas lecture

at the royal institution
in 1974.

I can make him raise it.

Now...

Laithwaite suggested
that, by spinning a heavy wheel,

you could make it
counteract gravity.

Ron has returned
to the royal institution

to try and recreate the effect.

- Does it feel light?
- It does. It feels very light.

With the help of fellow engineer

Dr. Adam Wojciech.

If I slow down, it feels...

what I think was at the back
of Laithwaite's mind

was that there was a force

in one direction
more than in the other

and so the gyro
will start to rise up

and that gives you the illusion
as though it's losing weight.

It isn't.

It's just an illusion.

It isn't light.

When a gyroscope is
rotated in the same direction

it's spinning,
it's given an upward lift.

And if I rotate
in the opposite sense.

Ohhh, that does look heavy.

Oh, careful, careful, careful.
Wow.

When it's rotated
in the opposite direction,

the opposite happens
and it seems to get heavier.

Still hoping
to make gravity control

a subject of serious research,

Laithwaite acknowledged
his mistake.

Yet, his reputation
was permanently damaged.

He was snubbed by the
academic establishment.

And felt compelled
to leave his position

at the royal institution.

Professor Laithwaite got
into a lot of trouble

with this, really,
because of the claim

that it got lighter,
which is antigravity,

and academics jump
on any antigravity device

as being impossible!

Well, it's not impossible.

It's just we don't know how
to do it.

But we should look.

It's like flight
in the last century.

In those days, anybody
that said they could fly

was looked upon as a lunatic!

The difference is
that, before humans could fly,

we knew birds could.

We could study aerodynamics.

But there was nothing we knew of

that could actually
overcome gravity.

The dream of lifting
effortlessly from the earth

is not confined to engineers.

Despite being so contentious,

many academics are rather
seduced by the idea.

Dr. Tamara Davis is among them.

From a little kid,
I always wanted to go

and visit other planets
and go up into space

and to be able to have
a form of propulsion

that could get me there easily
would be fantastic.

But we don't yet know whether
we can manipulate gravity

or have any control over it.

There is one, fundamental force

we know we can control,

which we've used
to build our modern world:

Electromagnetism.

It gives us a tantalizing
illusion of gravity control

when we levitate a magnet.

Ta-da!

Electromagnetic propulsion

balances the weight
of the magnet

by using the same magnetic
polarity in the base.

We know that like charges repel,

so, here, we just have
a magnetic field

that's levitating a magnet.

So this is nothing mysterious.

This is just electromagnetism.

Let's see if I can get
this across.

Ah.

The power of control
we get from electromagnetism

lies in the fact that
we can change its polarity

and make it either repel
or attract.

So, in electromagnetism,
we have positive charges

and negative charges and they
tend to attract each other.

If you have a positive charge
and a positive charge,

it will repel from each other,
but wouldn't it be great

if we could get gravity
to where it can reverse

and be able to levitate
things using gravity?

Only problem is there isn't
any negative gravity.

There isn't any antigravity
that pushes.

Gravity always pulls,
as far as we now.

The reason seems to be
that, unlike electromagnetism,

gravity has only kind
of polarity:

Positive.

One mass is simply
attracted to another.

Gravity and electromagnetism
are completely different forces.

There's a very special
property of gravity.

That is that it adds up.

Inside an atom,
there's a positive nucleus

surrounded
by negative electrons.

So the electromagnetic
value cancels out,

whereas, there's nothing
to cancel out its mass.

So the force on one atom

adds to the force
on another atom

and so they generate an
attractive gravitational force,

so, if you get enough
of those atoms together,

like in a planet or in a star,

then the gravitational force
is very strong.

So, gravity is different.

It adds up as you increase
the amount of matter,

in a way the other forces don't.

In 1996, a Russian
scientist working in Finland

claimed to have done
the very thing

the skeptics
said was impossible:

Control gravity.

Dr. Eugene Podkletnov

had been using a machine
called a cryostat

to cool electrical
superconductors

when something
very strange happened.

One evening, we were
working with our cryostat

and one of my colleagues,
who was leaving at that time,

just came to the laboratory
and said,

"guys, what are you doing here?"
And we said, "just working."

And he was smoking his pipe.

A very interesting person.

It is, by the way,
not allowed, to smoke a pipe

in the laboratory,
but it was late in the evening.

And he blew his pipe
over the cryostat

and the smoke went close
to the cryostat,

hit some unseen barrier,
and, very fast, went up.

And it was pretty amazing.

He repeated this several times

and said, "you are working
with magic things" and he left.

So that was the beginning.

After months of investigation,

Podkletnov concluded
that what he'd created was

an antigravity field.

So we have a vacuum chamber
with a disc

which can be rotated over
10,000 rotations per minute.

And this is a weight sample

which can move freely
over the disc.

And when the disc reaches
a certain speed of rotation,

it exerts a repulsive force
on the weight sample

and pushes it up.

In fact, this is a direct
demonstration

of the gravity field.

This gravity field is,
in our case, repulsive

and, as you can see,

the repulsive force
is pretty big.

Hearing about the experiment,

Ron Evans organized
a team at Greenglow

to try to recreate
Podkletnov's breakthrough.

But they didn't have the budget

to work with the highly
specialized superconductor.

We couldn't replicate
what he'd done,

so we couldn't say, yes,
he had found it, in effect;

or no, he hadn't.

By now, Marc Millis
at NASA also wanted to know

if there was something
in Podkletnov's claim

and he had a much bigger budget.

We found people
who replicated the experiment

with Podkletnov's help
and they even had 50 times

the detection sensitivity
that Podkletnov had had,

and did not find any effect.

Despite exhaustive tests,

no one seemed able to reproduce

Podkletnov's
so-called gravity field.

I think Podkletnov
had jumped to a conclusion,

had seen some things,

and did not take the rigor
to go through and make sure

that he wasn't
misleading himself.

Meanwhile, news
of Podkletnov's breakthrough

had been leaked to the press
and the resulting media storm

ultimately forced him to leave
his university position.

So Podkletnov went back
to Moscow, to work in secret

and, by late 2001,
he had claimed

he had a new way
to manipulate gravity.

Wary of the western media,
he contacted the one man

he trusted to give him
a fair hearing:

Ron Evans, at Greenglow.

Because of his
security conCERNs,

Podkletnov was only prepared
to tell Ron the basic concept.

I presented to him

my latest works with
impulse gravity generator,

which gives a very sharp
impulse of gravity waves.

It's really a giant
spark plug, really,

but, according
to Dr. Podkletnov,

someone way away,
a kilometer away,

on the balcony of some flats
in line with the beam,

were still able to detect
a slight effect.

That was incredible.

For years,
the gravity pulse concept

remained shrouded in secrecy
and stayed unproven.

But, by the early 2000s,
a new generation of scientists

had picked up the Baton
from Project Greenglow,

including Dr. Martin Tajmar,

professor of space systems
at Dresden university.

If you look for a challenge,

always look for a big challenge.

The ultimate challenge
I can think of as a scientist

is to control gravity.

That's maybe the most difficult
thing there is, right?

Martin is about
to comprehensively test

Podkletnov's concept,
once and for all.

His claims are
that they can drill holes

into brick walls
and this kind of stuff,

which is an extraordinary claim.

And, if you
have an extraordinary claim,

you must have
extraordinary proof.

Antigravity is a kind of
synonym for the impossible.

But always be ready
for the surprise.

This, in effect,

is Podkletnov's
gravity pulse generator,

recreated by Martin
and his team.

As Ron Evans guessed,
it's based in a kind of

giant spark plug; Essentially,
two electrodes in a box.

Basically, you have
two electrodes,

one here and one here

and you're running
a very, very high

electric current discharge
through that.

This discharge goes
through a superconductor.

According to Podkletnov,

this somehow creates a pulse
of gravity which is picked up

by a sensor acting
like an electronic pendulum.

And let's say if you have
your pendulum here,

that, when this gravitational
impulse hits the pendulum,

you will actually get
a deflection of the pendulum.

And so the claim is that this is
actually also creating

not only an electric discharge,

but a kind of
a gravitational impulse,

a push to something
at a distance.

The superconductor
is cooled with liquid nitrogen

to remove its
electrical resistance.

Podkletnov claimed the resulting
massive electrical discharge

creates the gravitational pulse.

They switch on the power
to charge up the system

and wait for the discharge.

Counting down.

There is a reading.

So here's the data.

Gravity goes
with the speed of light,

so you should see
an instantaneous peak

and then the sound
from this bang,

this takes some time
until it arrives,

so we should see
two distinct peaks

because we have such
a high time resolution.

So that's the acoustic impulse
and exactly here,

that's where the gravitational
impulse should be,

where we don't see it.

The sensor felt
the sound wave from the spark,

but no gravity pulse.

That's the most sensitive sensor
there is in the world

and we don't even see something
out of the noise,

so how can he make a claim
to say that it moved things

meters away or that it actually
pushed pendulums away?

So that's a really
outrageous claim.

We haven't seen something
not even remotely like that, so.

Unfortunately, but, yeah,
so far, no luck.

None of Podkletnov's methods

seem to be able
to alter gravity in the lab.

Could the reason be
a simple problem of scale?

There is one industry

that has to deal with gravity
on a planetary scale:

The space business.

They're always clamoring
for some form

of gravity-beating propulsion.

Marc Millis ran NASA's
breakthrough propulsion project.

One of its long-term goals was
to move away from using rockets.

The problem with rockets is not
that they can't beat gravity.

It's the amount of thrust
they need to do it.

If you think
about the Apollo spacecraft

and you imagine here's saturn 5,

the very tip of that and then
a little bit below that

was the actual
spacecraft, itself,

and all the rest of this
was the propellant,

the rocket fuel,
and that's just to the moon.

NASA plans to get
humans to Mars and back

within the next 15 years

and, maybe one day, beyond
the solar system, itself.

But just the martian step

seems impractical
with conventional rockets

because leaving the earth's
gravity takes some much fuel.

The farther or faster
that you wanna go,

or more that you wanna carry,

you need this extra propellant
to do that and then,

you need extra propellant
for the extra propellant

and it adds up exponentially.

If you wanted to go to our
nearest neighboring star,

which is over
4 light-years away,

and you wanted to do it
with the kind of rockets

that are on the space shuttle,

and say you wanna do it
in 50 years,

you're having to go 1/10
of the speed of light.

Well, the amount of propellant
you need for that journey is

about the mass
of our entire sun.

For Marc Millis and NASA,

the focus was less
on controlling gravity, itself,

than finding ways
to get to the stars.

They didn't care how long,

as long as it didn't need
rocket fuel.

Then in 2002,
a new device appeared

that seemed to offer a solution.

Invented by a former defense
research engineer,

Roger shawyer.

The big advantage of emdrive
is that it's a device

which creates a force,
but it doesn't have to

shoot out a propellant
out of the back.

Instead of using
rocket fuel to create thrust,

the emdrive uses
microwave energy,

just like a domestic oven.

Microwaves bounce around
inside the box in waves,

cooking your food.

To stop that energy cooking you,

there is a mesh on the door
with holes in it.

The diameter of these
holes are so small that,

instead of going through it,
microwave radiation

is actually bouncing up and down
vertically in the hole.

The holes trap the waves,

slowing them to a standstill.

According to Roger,

the narrow end of his emdrive
does exactly the same job.

The waves are going
faster at the large end

than they are at the small end.

This means that the force
at the large end

is greater than the force
at the small end,

which will cause the cavity to
move in the opposite direction.

It would only produce
a small amount of thrust,

but, in space,
that wouldn't matter.

An emdrive thruster with
continuous electrical power

gives you continuous
acceleration

and therefore, you can achieve

very large velocities

and travel very large distances.

Roger believes that,
if he could make it big enough,

it could potentially
lift us from the earth.

You suddenly have a lift engine

which simply hovers there

or, indeed, accelerates upwards,

so, we can obviously envisage

launching large payloads
into space

on a emdrive-driven
space plane.

Essentially, we are no longer
looking at ways

that we can control
gravity, itself.

We are beating gravity
the smart way.

If it works.

Though he didn't claim
to control gravity,

Roger's emdrive concept

was rejected by a lot
of theoretical scientists,

who claimed the basic physics
just didn't add up.

To settle the argument between
the theorists and engineers,

Martin Tajmar had the perfect
test facility in Dresden.

A large vacuum chamber
mounted on dampers,

to isolate it
from the surrounding world,

a carefully designed rig
to hold the drive

with a finely tuned balance
to record any thrust...

And, most importantly,

a copy of Roger shawyer's
original emdrive.

Martin's version is small,
but, if the principal works,

there should be
measurable thrust.

The vacuum chamber is sealed.

The thrust recorder inside
is so sensitive,

it can detect Martin
sitting down outside.

We're here
in a laboratory on earth,

so there's some
seismic movement.

So the balance itself
will move just a little bit.

That's the noise
we are seeing here.

The emdrive is switched on.

Nothing appears to move.

But, on Martin's screen,
there is a reading.

When we turn on the thruster,
the balance, indeed, reacts

and we measure something which
looks actually like a thrust.

What we are measuring here
in this case

is of like 25 micronewtons.

That's very, very small.

You can compare this,
for example,

to 1/10 of the weight force

of a grain of rice,
Incredibly small.

Still, however, useful,
for example.

In space, we have
thrusters, actually,

which have this tiny
amount of force,

which is still useful
to maneuver spacecraft,

for instance.

The first results seem positive.

But, when Martin
experimented further,

he discovered a problem.

So, with the thruster
pointing in that direction,

we measured thrust
in that direction

and, when we tilted it
90°, however,

we still measured thrust
in this direction,

which we shouldn't have.

There can still be
some major influence from,

for example,
the power-feeding lines

that we still need to solve,
to find out

what's the real thrust
produced by the emdrive,

if there is any thrust produced.

The great hope
of the emdrive was that,

as a kind of
propellantless rocket,

it would at least power vehicles
in space: NASA's dream.

But NASA didn't pursue
the idea any further,

or any other gravity-defying
concepts, because, in 2002,

they discontinued
Marc Millis's project.

The project ended
when the funding

for all propulsion
research was cut.

It wasn't just breakthrough
propulsion physics.

It was a congressional earmark
to build a building

in a certain state
and that took all the funding.

It happens.

Main progress that we made is
we took science-fiction notions

and evolved them to at least

the first step
of the scientific method.

That step, by itself,
is a degree of progress that,

if I don't accomplish any more,

it's like "yeah,
that was pretty good."

Ron Evans kept going
for another 3 years.

But, when he retired, in 2005,

bae closed down
Project Greenglow.

Is it a shame?

Yeah, I suppose so.

I would like to have
worked at a company

that actually made
this idea work.

It was a lovely idea.

When Greenglow ended,

the hope of mastering gravity
seemed to end with it.

If that was ever
going to change,

we needed to go much deeper into
how gravity actually worked.

Our understanding of gravity

has come down from Galileo,
Newton, and Einstein,

from observations rooted
in the motions of the heavens.

Now those same heavens seem
to be showing us something

that looks remarkably
like antigravity.

The idea that the universe

has some inherent form
of antigravity is tantalizing.

If only we could get
our hands on it.

The problem is no one knows
what this antigravity force

actually is, only that it seems
to originate from space, itself.

Although we think of space
as this emptiness,

the absence of stuff,
it actually isn't.

There is something
that's intrinsic

to the nature of space
that imparted an energy.

And one of the big mysteries is

where does that energy
come from?

A number of scientists
think the answer

to this big question
could lie in the very small...

the very, very, very small...
world of subatomic particles:

Quantum physics.

According to current
quantum theory,

particles can spontaneously
appear from nowhere.

Apparently, they just pop
into existence

in the vacuum of space.

Matter and antimatter, which,
because they're opposites,

cancel each other out
in an instant.

The lifetime is one-thousandth

of one-billionth of
one-billionth of a second.

We are now in an ocean
of particle/antiparticle pairs,

permanently appearing
and disappearing.

Dr. Dragan Hajduković

thinks something else happens
to these particles

to produce
an antigravity effect.

For the briefest moment
of their existence,

these particles can be
polarized, like iron filings.

The trouble is to get it
in a random orientation.

If there is a magnetic field,

the random orientation
will change.

Yes.

According to Dragan,

in the same way iron filings
respond to a magnet,

pairs of quantum particles
respond to mass.

With matter and antimatter,
pairs are briefly

orienting themselves
in relation to that mass.

Matter is attracted
to the positive mass

of a planet or a star, while
antimatter is repelled by it.

Dragan believes
this creates a halo of

antigravity dark energy around
every mass in the universe.

All these halos
together has negative pressure,

what is exactly what we need,
in cosmological equations,

to produce the accelerated
expansion of the universe.

It means that there
are both positive

and negative
gravitational charges.

So far, we know that gravity's
only attraction.

It may be that gravity

is also repulsion, but not
between matter and matter,

but between matter
and antimatter.

Dragan's theory,
that the key to antigravity lies

in antimatter,
is actually going to be tested.

Here, in the world's
biggest physics lab,

at CERN, in Switzerland,

not in the famous
large hadron collider,

but in the improbably named
antimatter factory,

at its Alpha experiment.

A team led by Jeffrey Hangst

is building a machine that,
in a couple of years,

will answer one of the biggest
questions in gravity research:

Does antimatter fall down or up?

Hi, Dragan.
Hi.

- Welcome to Alpha.
- Good to see you again.

Come on in. Let's take
a look at this machine.

Alpha is part
of CERN's ongoing exploration

into the nature
of matter and gravity.

So, right now,
what we're doing is

we're routinely
trapping antihydrogen.

But, for Dragan Hajduković,
it will be make or break.

Trapping antihydrogen
to prepare for the...

if he's right,
creating antigravity on earth

is at least a theoretical
possibility.

From Einstein's perspective,
mass actually distorts

the fabric of space and time,
or space-time, as it's called.

That distortion is rather
like a well.

So here's another object
that's moving nearby,

our mass that has bent
space-time

and, as it goes past, it bends
towards the massive object.

But a negative mass would be,
in our analogy here,

something like a mound,
instead of a depression.

And then you run into problems.

The problem,
according to Einstein,

is that using a negative mass
would mean inverting space-time,

effectively turning the fabric
of the universe inside-out.

And what you end up
with is something

that's called a runaway problem.

You have physics that is just
running out of control.

It'll accelerate away
arbitrarily

with zero cost of energy
and, if that were really

happening anywhere
in the universe,

we'd see it spectacularly
becoming an unstable situation.

If Clifford Johnson

and other theoretical
physicists are right,

antigravity propulsion
will remain an unworkable dream.

It seems the laws of physics
simply don't allow it.

At least, not as we understand
those laws today.

Because, just as Galileo
gave way to Newton

and Newton gave way to Einstein,
theories do change.

And, in the meantime, well,

the engineers get on with doing
what engineers do:

Building new kinds
of propulsion.

Today, that includes NASA.

At the Glenn research
laboratory in Ohio,

work is underway to produce
new forms of space engines,

ones that really could take us
where rockets can't:

Beyond our solar system.

What we have here is
a high-powered ion thruster

and the way it produces
thrust are

ions are created
inside this ring

and then, we establish
electrostatic potential

that accelerates these ions out
and produces large velocities.

And what that does is

it gives us very efficient
production of thrust.

This is
an ion thruster under test,

pouring out a constant stream
of charged particles.

It's less powerful
than a rocket, but capable

of accelerating a spacecraft
almost indefinitely.

These systems are ideal
for in space, you know.

We operate them purely in space
because it's very gentle.

You know,
the thrust level is low,

but, over time, you can develop
much higher velocities

than you can
with chemical rockets.

NASA's focus is
on space propulsion

beyond the earth's gravitation,

yet there is
a propulsion concept

that aims to revolutionize
all of aerospace,

resurrected from the days
of Project Greenglow.

10 years ago,
Project Greenglow ended

and Ron Evans thought

officially gravity research
had ended with it.

But, today, he's been invited

to witness a unique
gravitational breakthrough.

When Ron first began
his gravity research,

Could gravity be used

to detect aircraft
that were invisible to radar?

In the 1980s,
our complete inability

to work with gravity
made it impossible,

but, today, Ron is meeting
someone who says he's done it.

This time, there are
no covert meetings.

He's going inside england's
ministry of defence

research laboratory
at porton down.

Ron, good morning.

Welcome to defence
science and technology.

Neil stansfield
heads a department here

that looks at what they call
disruptive technology.

And they've taken
a potential step

on the road to gravity control
using quantum engineering.

So what we have here is

our quantum gravity gradiometer.

It's a small system.

At the heart of the device,

we have a vacuum chamber.

The sensor uses lasers
to freeze a cloud of atoms.

This cloud responds
to disturbances

in the earth's
gravitational field

caused by a moving mass.

The atoms are sensitive enough

to detect the mass of my body

at a range of about 1 meter.

So your gravitational field
is affecting this device?

Yes.

This is the first time

Ron has seen anyone
actually using gravity.

To me, this is
amazing technology.

Getting into the quantum,
that's really allowing us

to do things that

were just unbelievable
30 years ago.

Yes, some people use the phrase

"they break the laws
of physics."

I prefer to say they break
the laws of physics

as we understand them today.

A hundred years ago,

we didn't understand
the quantum physics.

The idea of being able
to measure changes

in gravity?
Science-fiction.

Could never happen.
Today, we can.

Yes.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Ron Evans's mission
to control gravity began here,

in a cold, wet corner
of lancashire,

where people go
to live their dreams,

where no one ever worried
about the word "impossible".

Aaaaah!

For Ron Evans, gravity control
is just something

we haven't learned to do.

Yet.

I'm sure we will, one day.

It's just a matter of time.

Aaah!